obiedenfandomcom-20200214-history
Wikipedia
Wikipedia was once a Friendly Encyclopedia which it's users had nothing to worried about until it changed from the Wikipedia the trusted to the non trustable Wikipedia. Things People Like About Wikipedia up-to-date # Pictures on there Wikipedia's Downfall Wikipedia used to be non-bias until it's rules and regulations is nothing but an lie since even though people follow them , the truth about them is that they have Israeli federal government's internet manipulators , manipulating their own content to keep everyone from knowing the truth. They publish propaganda by government's who wants to control masses and continue to deceive it's readers. many people have been disappointed. Wikipedia claim's they are "non bias" but they wont allow other view points from various people but they allow "bias" information that is manipulated information or just 1 view point that is the American Government's Point of View (AGPOV) or as known as the "Official Story". So Many People have been misinformed and offended by Wikipedia. Israeli Federal Government has hired internet workers to do nothing but Manipulate as much information on the internet as possiblehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-x2DFnGI9Ac. The Israeli Federal Government's Internet Manipulators make Wikipedia a Very "Inaccurate Encyclopedia articles" that's why School's don't trust them one bit since they tamper with the learning process. Wikipedia hasn't been using reliable sources as they should've. And The Israeli Federal Government's Internet Manipulators help Governments like the American federal Government to Dumb their Readers down. The consequences from that alone is people losing interest in it. The reason people lose interest in it is all about information quality , lowest quality information is manipulated information. The Case: Abby Martin vs. Wikipedia does show that Wikipedia does decide who is notable and who isn't. Wikipedia is in a form of a Dictatorship based on Actions. Wikipedia Lacks a Criticism section on it's own page. Even Harvard agrees that Wikipedia is not a Reliable Resourceshttp://isites.harvard.edu/icb/icb.do?keyword=k70847&pageid=icb.page346376.Insted of them adding a Criticism Section on their own Wiki page , they decided to make an whole new page just for that The Admins of Wikipedia who Refuse to accept Criticism and then use an excuse to remove it. Oppose addition as well and agree it's clearly WP:UNDUE. --— Rhododendrites talk | 03:32, 12 January 2014 (UTC) Wikipedia Refuses to Accept Solid Facts from people and all they ever do is keep their own version, pristine untouchable. Since They make Wikipedia invalidated on information. Zionists oversees these supereditors / admins on Wikipedia. The World See's Wikipedia as a Garbage Site and the World doesn't event like or trust Wikipedia due to how deceiving they are. Encyclopedia Dramatica is right about Wikipedia being a one Sided Veiw point due to how bias Wikipedia isWikipedia - Encyclopedia Dramatica . Ignore All Rules Rule This Rule is the Coldest and Darkest Rule of Wikipedia Since the Admins of Wikipedia Favorite this rule all the time ,and it gives them unfair advantages and this rule lacks having Common Sense and Never Preserves Common Sense. This Rule Makes Wikipedia a hypocrite. The admins of Wikipedia claims this rule "Never Exists" when it really does Exist since this rule gives the admins of Wikipedia and Wikipedia to bully anyone they want. This Rule is the Most Ignorant Rule of all of Wikipedia. This Rule allows the admins of Wikipedia to Ban someone with no Proof and Reason why they did , start Arguments that can go on for days , Stress it own users out , And Has Cause their own Users to quit Wikipedia. Harvard Caution when you're doing academic research, you should be "extremely cautious" about using Wikipedia. As its own disclaimer states, information on Wikipedia is contributed by anyone who wants to post material, and the expertise of the posters is not taken into consideration. Users may be reading information that is outdated or that has been posted by someone who is not an expert in the field or by someone who wishes to provide misinformation. (Case in point: Four years ago, an Expos student who was writing a paper about the limitations of Wikipedia posted a fictional entry for himself, stating that he was the mayor of a small town in China. Four years later, if you type in his name, or if you do a subject search on Wikipedia for mayors of towns in China, you will still find this fictional entry.) Some information on Wikipedia may well be accurate, but because experts do not review the site's entries, there is a considerable risk in relying on this source for your essays and researchWhat's Wrong with Wikipedia? . MIT Review of Wikipedia The community that built the largest encyclopedia in history is shrinking, even as more people and Internet services depend on it than ever.The Decline of Wikipedia Newcomers Unwelcomed: When Wikipedia launched in 2001, it wasn't intended to be an information source in its own right. Wales, a financial trader turned Internet entrepreneur, and Larry Sanger, a freshly minted philosophy PhD, started the site to boost Nupedia, a free online encyclopedia started by Wales that relied on contributions from experts. After a year, Nupedia offered a strange collection of only 13 articles on such topics as Virgil and the Donegal fiddle tradition. Sanger and Wales hoped Wikipedia, where anyone could start or modify an entry, would rapidly generate new articles that experts could then finish up.http://m.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/520446/the-decline-of-wikipedia/ Wikipedia's Respect Towards New and Current Users The Truth is that it's Very Low, so low they end up becoming a cyber bully and get mad at you for doing nothing wrong. The Common Excuse Wikipedia admins use to new users "this user is not a Wikipedia editor" and no proof of why or any explanation why though. Plus they put so much Stress and Anger on New Users that it Causes them to simply quit. all non-administrative users have been indefinitely blocked from recreating Abby Martin's Page and other independent journalists' pages.The Admins of Wikipedia Create Arguments to those who say "Common Sense isn't Common" as in the Admins Make a big Deal over the Truth. Wikipedia Attacks Russia Today's Abby Martin Earlier this week, "Breaking the Set" host Abby Martin learned she's "not a notable enough figure" to warrant a Wikipedia page, despite a plethora of third-party sources. She's had two pages about her deleted, and now all non-administrative users have been blocked from recreating her page indefinitely, according to the revision history of her page after Martin reported the issue on Monday's episode of "Breaking the Set."https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_50wRWuoT8. Video Links #Wikipedia - Israel is paying internet workers to manipulate online content #Wikipedia: Editing Truth by Mob Rule #Abby Martin vs Wikipedia #Abby Martin 'indefinitely' blocked from Wikipedia Don't Trust Wikipedia As global conflicts lurch into the second half of 2014, the nature of their online documentation is of great importance, and the Wikimedia Foundation bears great responsibility. Satirist Nimrod Kamer put their staffers to the test in a report for RT. Kamer reports for RT from Wikimania, the annual Wikipedia festival to probe the founders over locked pages, ‘article vandalism’, and the deficit of emojis on Wikipedia articles posing questions to the foundation’s chiefs and using examples from his own page edits to illustrate the fallibility of the online encyclopedia. Now and then, entries get ‘locked’ because of excessive editing, and topics such as the Israel/Gaza conflict, MH370 and even the Ebola virus have fallen victim to such edits. “Entries like this are locked temporarily from time to time when there's excessive vandalism or an argument has broken out that's become too emotional or too personal,” Jimmy Wales, Co-founder of Wikipedia told RT.http://rt.com/news/180908-wikipedia-trolls-ebola-gaza/ References Category:Wikipedia Category:Wiki Sites on the Internet Category:Wiki Sites